Order Code RL32817
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Child Care Issues in the 109th Congress
Updated March 9, 2006
Melinda Gish
Specialist in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Child Care Issues in the 109th Congress
Summary
Federal support for child care comes in many forms, ranging from grant
programs to tax provisions. Some programs serve as specifically dedicated funding
sources for child care services [e.g., the Child Care and Development Block Grant
(CCDBG)], while for others [e.g., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF)], child care is just one of many purposes for which funds may be used. In
many cases, federal programs target low-income families in need of child care
assistance, but in the case of certain tax provisions, the benefits reach middle- and
upper-income families as well. This report provides an overview of federal child
care and related programs, and tracks issues being addressed by the 109th Congress.
The 109th Congress inherited several child care-related agenda items from the
previous Congress(es), and has resolved only a few. Efforts to reauthorize the
CCDBG and TANF block grants, as well as the Head Start program, have been
underway since last Congress (108th), and only recently, after 12 temporary
extensions, was the TANF block grant and the mandatory portion of child care
funding reauthorized for a 5-year period, via the Deficit Reduction Act (P.L. 109-
171). Bills to reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant itself (H.R.
240 and S. 525), and the Head Start Program (H.R. 2123 and S. 2206), have failed
to make their way to enactment in law, and remain on the agenda.

Funding for most child care and related programs is provided through the annual
appropriations process, either under the Department of Health and Human Services,
or the Department of Education. The FY2006 Act was signed into law (P.L. 109-
149) on December 30, 2005. The law includes funding slightly below last year’s
amounts for most child care and related programs, as a result of an across-the-board
rescission of 1% applied to most discretionary programs. Additional funding for
Head Start and the Social Services Block Grant — funding targeted specifically in
response to needs arising from the Gulf Coast hurricanes of 2005 — is included in
the FY2006 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148). Shortly after passage of the
FY2006 appropriations measures, the President released his budget request for
FY2007, in which he proposes level funding for most child care related programs.
Exceptions include the Social Services Block Grant, which the Administration
proposes to cut by $500 million, and Even Start, which it proposes to eliminate.
The FY2007 budget proposals in areas related to child care and early childhood
development were framed in the context of the Administration’s Early Childhood
Initiative — “Good Start, Grow Smart” — which was initially launched in April
2002. The initiative emphasizes the importance of promoting school readiness, a key
focus of the President’s Head Start reauthorization proposals. In efforts to promote
school readiness among pre-school children, there is also a growing emphasis on
better coordination of early childhood programs, including most of the federal
programs described in this report, as well as state pre-kindergarten programs and
other state-funded efforts.
This report will be updated to reflect relevant legislative activity.

---

Contents
Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
President’s FY2007 Budget Released . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Budget Reconciliation: Mandatory Child Care Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2006 Labor-HHS- Education Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Hurricane Response in FY2006 Defense Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Federal Child Care-Related Programs and Tax Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Head Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Even Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Programs . . . . . . . 5
Early Reading First . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Early Childhood Educator Professional Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CAMPIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Early Learning Fund/Early Learning Opportunities Act Program . . . . . 6
Dependent Care Tax Credit (DCTC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Dependent Care Assistance Program (DCAP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
FY2006 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
President’s FY2006 request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Senate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
President Bush’s FY2007 Budget Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
CCDBG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
SSBG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Head Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
21st Century Community Learning Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
IDEA Grants for Infants and Families and Preschool Grants . . . . . . . 12
Even Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CAMPIS) . . . . . . . . . . . 12
The Administration’s Early Childhood Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Legislative Activity in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Child Care and Welfare Reauthorizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Head Start Reauthorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Other Child Care-Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Response to Hurricane Katrina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Hearings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
List of Tables
Table 1. Funding for Federal Child Care and Related Programs,
FY2002-FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Table 2. FY2006 Appropriations Compared with House- and Senate-Passed
Levels, and President’s FY2006 Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

---

Table 3. President’s FY2007 Funding Request Compared to FY2006
Funding for Select Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

---

Child Care Issues in the 109th Congress
Recent Developments
President’s FY2007 Budget Released. The President released his budget
request for FY2007 on February 6, 2006. With the exception of the Social Services
Block Grant, which the Administration proposes to cut by $500 million, and Even
Start, which it proposes to eliminate, funding for child care and related programs
would be maintained at their FY2006 funding levels in FY2007. For more
information on the President’s FY2007 budget request, see President Bush’s FY2007
Budget Request, later in this report.
Budget Reconciliation: Mandatory Child Care Funding. The Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005, a spending budget reconciliation bill (S. 1932) was signed
into law (P.L. 109-171) on February 8, 2006. The law increases mandatory child care
funding by $1 billion over five years (FY2006-FY2010), amounting to $2.917 billion
annually.
FY2006 Labor-HHS- Education Appropriations. Following enactment
of three continuing resolutions, a bill making FY2006 appropriations for the
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services (HHS), and Education (H.R.
3010) was signed into law (P.L. 109-149) by the President on December 30, 2005.
Discretionary funding provided under the measure is subject to an across-the-board
rescission of 1%. For information on the amounts appropriated (post-rescission) for
child care and several other early childhood-related programs, see Table 1, later in
this report.

Hurricane Response in FY2006 Defense Appropriations. The Defense
Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148) includes $90 million in additional funding for
Head Start, to be used specifically for grantees serving children displaced by last
year’s Gulf Coast hurricanes, and to help with costs of renovating Head Start
facilities that were affected by the storms. Those funds will not be allocated
according to the standard Head Start formula due to the targeted purpose of the
funding. The Head Start Bureau has taken action to assess and address the needs of
Head Start grantees in response to last year’s hurricanes. Data collected will be used
to determine allocation of the $90 million to affected grantees.
In addition, the law includes SSBG funding in the amount of $550 million for
use in covering expenses related to the consequences of last year’s hurricanes in the
Gulf of Mexico. In addition to the standard service categories for which SSBG funds
may be applied (of which child day care is one), the Defense Appropriations Act
expands the potential services for which the additional $550 million may be used, to
include “health services (including mental health services) and for repair, renovation
and construction of health facilities (including mental health facilities).” The act

---

CRS-2
does not stipulate how the funds will be allocated among affected states, only that
section 2003 of SSBG law, which would allocate funds to states nationwide based
on population, is notwithstanding.
See the section entitled Response to Hurricane Katrina, later in this report, for
details on efforts by the Child Care and Head Start Bureaus of HHS to provide for
needs arising after the Gulf Coast hurricanes.
Federal Child Care-Related Programs and Tax Provisions
Several federal programs support child care or related services, primarily for
low-income working families. In addition, the tax code includes provisions
specifically targeted to assist families with child care expenses. Descriptions of those
programs and tax provisions follow, as does Table 1, which shows funding (or
estimated revenue loss or obligations where applicable) for the programs and tax
provisions for the past five years. In many cases, other Congressional Research
Service (CRS) reports are referenced as sources for more detailed information about
individual programs. Several programs remain due for reauthorization this Congress
(i.e., Child Care and Development Block Grant and Head Start) or have been
reauthorized in this second session of the 109th (TANF and mandatory child care
funding), and readers should be aware that this report does not attempt to cover all
issues connected with each of those reauthorizations.
Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG).1 The primary
federal grant program funding child care is the CCDBG, which was created in 1990,
and reauthorized and substantially expanded in 1996, as part of welfare reform. The
CCDBG has been due to be reauthorized since the end of FY2002, and remains a
potential agenda item for this Congress. (See the Legislative Activity section of this
report.) The CCDBG is administered by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), and provides formula block grants to states, which use the grants to
subsidize the child care expenses of families with children under age 13, if the
parents are working or in school and family income is less than 85% of the state
median. (In practice, many states establish income eligibility levels that are lower
than this federal threshold.) Child care services are provided on a sliding fee scale
basis, and parents may choose to receive assistance through vouchers or certificates,
which can be used with a provider of the parents’ choice, including sectarian
providers and relatives.
States receiving CCDBG funds must establish child care licensing standards,
although federal law does not dictate what these standards should be or what types
of providers must be covered. In addition, states must have health and safety
requirements applicable to all providers receiving CCDBG subsidies that address
prevention and control of infectious diseases, building and physical premises safety,
and health and safety training for care givers. However, federal law does not dictate
the specific contents of these requirements.
1 For more information, see CRS Report RL30785, The Child Care and Development Block
Grant: Background and Funding, by Melinda Gish.

---

CRS-3
The CCDBG is funded through both discretionary and capped entitlement grants
(referred to in combination as the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF)), and
state maintenance-of-effort (MOE) and matching requirements apply to part of the
entitlement funds.2 States must use at least 4% of their total funds to improve the
quality and availability of child care, and according to statute, must target 70% of
entitlement funds on welfare recipients working toward self-sufficiency or families
at risk of welfare dependency. However, because all families falling below the 85%
of state median income requirement can be categorized as “at risk,” the 70% targeting
of the welfare or at-risk population does not necessarily mean welfare families must
be served. In theory, all funds may be used for low-income, non-welfare, working
families. However, state plans indicate that many states guarantee child care to
welfare families. No more than 5% of state allotments may be used for state
administrative costs.
In the most recent funding measure, the FY2006 Appropriations Act for the
Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education (P.L. 109-149) includes roughly $2.1
billion in discretionary funding for the CCDBG. (An across-the-board rescission of
1% brought the precise total to $2.062 billion.) For FY2005, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-447) provided $2.083 billion. Mandatory (or
“entitlement”) CCDBG funding beginning in FY2003 through FY2005 was provided
at the FY2002 rate ($2.717 billion for the year), under a series of funding extensions.
Ultimately, funding for a longer, five-year period (FY2006-FY2010) was included
in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, a budget spending reconciliation bill (S. 1932),
which was signed into law (P.L. 109-171) on February 8, 2006. This law provides
$2.917 billion annually for each of FY2006-2010.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). TANF, created in
the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193), provides fixed block grants for
state-designed programs of time-limited and work-conditioned aid to needy families
with children. The original legislation provided $16.5 billion annually through
FY2002, and after a series of twelve temporary extensions, Congress included several
welfare provisions (and mandatory child care funding) in its spending budget
reconciliation bill (S. 1932) which was signed into law (P.L. 109-171) on February
8, 2006. The law maintains the TANF block grant at $16.5 billion for FY2006-2010.
Child care is one of many services for which states may use TANF funding. In
FY2004, HHS reports that states spent $1.3 billion in federal TANF funds for child
care within the TANF program, and $1.92 billion in state TANF and separate state
program (SSP) MOE funds. (Of that $1.92 billion in state spending, approximately
$876 million could be “double counted” as state spending toward the CCDF MOE
requirement.)3 In addition, states may transfer up to 30% of their TANF allotments
to the CCDBG (CCDF), to be spent according to the rules of that program (as
2 For more detailed information on the CCDF financing structure and spending trends, see
CRS Report RL31274, Child Care: Funding and Spending under Federal Block Grants, by
Melinda Gish.
3 For more information on states’ use of TANF funds, see CRS Report RL32748, The
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on Financing and
Requirements for State Programs, by Gene Falk.

---

CRS-4
opposed to TANF rules). The transfer from the FY2004 TANF allotment to the
CCDBG totaled $1.9 billion (representing 11% of the FY2004 TANF allotment).
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). The CACFP provides
federal funds (in some cases commodities) for meals and snacks served in licensed
child care centers, family and group day care homes, and Head Start centers. Child
care providers that are exempt from state licensing requirements must comply with
alternative state or federal standards. Children under 12, migrant children under 15,
and children with disabilities of any age may participate, although most are
preschoolers. Eligible providers are usually public and private nonprofit
organizations. The CACFP is an open-ended entitlement, administered by the
Department of Agriculture. For FY2005, obligations are estimated to have been
$2.066 billion, increasing to $2.174 billion in FY2006.4
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG). Title XX of the Social Security Act
authorizes Social Services Block Grants, which may be used for social services at the
states’ discretion. There are no federal income eligibility requirements, targeting
provisions, service mandates, or matching requirements. The most recently
published HHS analysis of state expenditures indicates that almost 7% of total SSBG
expenditures made in FY2003 ($165 million) were for child care in that year, a
decrease from those made for child care in FY2002 ($205 million). Title XX is a
capped entitlement, and state allocations are based on relative population size. It
should be noted that although the SSBG has an entitlement ceiling, appropriations
may not always abide by it. For example, the ceiling in FY2001 was $1.7 billion;
however, Congress appropriated $1.725 billion for that year, despite the ceiling. The
FY2006 Appropriations Act for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education (P.L.
109-149) includes identical provisions to the FY2005 appropriations: $1.7 billion
for the SSBG and states’ authority to transfer up to 10% of their TANF block grants
to the SSBG. (Note: the SSBG is not a discretionary program, and thus is not
affected by the across-the-board rescission.) In addition to the regular SSBG
funding, an additional $550 million is provided in the Defense Appropriations Act
(P.L. 109-148), specifically targeted for needs arising from the Gulf Coast Hurricanes
of 2005.5
Head Start. Head Start provides comprehensive early childhood education
and development services to low-income preschool children, typically (but not
always) on a part-time basis. The Head Start Act has been due to be reauthorized
since the end of FY2003, but remains an unfinished legislative agenda item. Funding
has nevertheless been provided through the appropriations process. Under current
law, Head Start funds are provided directly by HHS to local grantees, which must
comply with detailed federal performance standards. In its budget request for
FY2006, the Administration proposed to give up to nine states the opportunity to
administer Head Start, provided they demonstrate how Head Start will be coordinated
with other preschool programs and services to emphasize developing skills and
4 See CRS Report RL31577, Child Nutrition and WIC Programs: Background and Funding,
by Joe Richardson.
5 See CRS Report 94-953, Social Services Block Grant (Title XX of the Social Security Act),
by Melinda Gish.

---

CRS-5
behaviors including language development; pre-reading skills; numeracy; and social
and emotional competence, while meeting state-established accountability standards.
This proposal proved controversial in both the House and Senate last Congress, and
was not proposed in either the reauthorization bill passed in the House (H.R. 2123)
or the Senate bill approved in committee (S. 1107) last year; nor did the President
propose it with his budget for FY2007.6
The most recent available data show funded enrollment for Head Start in
FY2004 to have totaled 905,851 children (of whom almost 62,000 were under age
three, participating in Early Head Start). The FY2006 Appropriations Act for the
Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education (P.L. 109-149) provides $6.786 billion
(post-rescission of 1%) for Head Start, a decrease from the FY2005 funding level
(post-rescission of 0.8%) of $6.843 billion. In addition, as mentioned earlier, the
Defense Appropriations Law (P.L. 109-148) provides $90 million in Head Start
funding to be used specifically for grantees serving children displaced by last year’s
Gulf Coast hurricanes, and to help with costs of renovating Head Start facilities that
were affected by the storms.
21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC). The 21st
Century Community Learning Centers program is administered by the Department
of Education and is authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA), as amended in 2002 by the No Child Left Behind Act (P.L. 107-110).7
Funding for the 21st CCLC program is provided to states under a formula grant, based
on states’ shares of Title I, Part A funds. States then use their allocations to make
competitive awards to local educational agencies, community-based organizations,
or consortia of public or private agencies that primarily serve students who attend
schools with concentrations of poor students or low-performing schools. The focus
of the program is to provide after-school academic enrichment opportunities for
children in these communities. The 1% rescission applied to the appropriation
provided by the FY2006 Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149) drops the funding level
to $981 million ($10 million less than FY2005 funding).
Even Start. The Department of Education administers the Even Start program,
which provides grants for family literacy projects that include early childhood
education.8 The appropriation for FY2006 is $99 million (post-rescission), a cut of
$126 million from the FY2005 funding level of $225 million.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Programs. The
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) authorizes an early intervention
program for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, and preschool
6 For more information, see CRS Report RL30952, Head Start: Background and Issues, by
Melinda Gish.
7 For more information, see CRS Report RL31240, 21st Century Community Learning
Centers in P.L. 107-110: Background and Funding, by Gail McCallion.
8 For more information, see CRS Report RL30448, Even Start Family Literacy Programs:
An Overview, and CRS Report RL33071, Even Start: Funding Controversy, by Gail
McCallion and Wayne C. Riddle.

---

CRS-6
grants for children with disabilities.9 IDEA was reauthorized during the 108th
Congress. FY2006 appropriations (post-rescission) for the IDEA infants and toddlers
program are $436 million, and the funding level for the preschool grants program is
$381 million.
Early Reading First. The Early Reading First program, authorized by the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (as amended), supports local
efforts to enhance the school readiness of young children — particularly those from
low-income families — through scientific research-based strategies and professional
development that are designed to enhance the verbal skills, phonological awareness,
letter knowledge, and pre-reading skills of preschool age children.10 The program
provides competitive grants to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) and to
public or private organizations or agencies that are located in eligible LEAs. The
Department of Education may award grants for up to six years. The FY2006
Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149) funds this program at $103 million (post-
rescission).
Early Childhood Educator Professional Development. The
Department of Education provides competitive grants to partnerships to improve the
knowledge and skills of early childhood educators who work in communities that
have high concentrations of children living in poverty. For each of FY2006 and
FY2005, approximately $15 million was appropriated for these grants.
Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CAMPIS). Authorized
under the Higher Education Act amendments of 1998, and first funded for FY1999
at $5 million, the CAMPIS program is designed to support the participation of low-
income parents in post-secondary education through campus-based child care
services. Discretionary grants of up to four years in duration are awarded
competitively to institutions of higher education, to either supplement existing child
care services, or to start a new program. Funding for FY2006 is $15.8 million.
Early Learning Fund/Early Learning Opportunities Act Program.
This HHS program (referred to by both names), authorized by the FY2001
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-554) was last funded in FY2005 at $36
million. The FY2006 Appropriations Act includes no funding for this program.
When funded, the program provided grants to communities to enhance school
readiness for children under five, specifically by funding efforts to improve the
cognitive, physical, social, and emotional development of these children. Although
authorized at $600 million, FY2002 funding for the program was set at $25 million;
FY2003 funding was set at $34 million (despite the President’s FY2003 budget
proposal to eliminate the program) and for FY2004, P.L. 108-199 included $34
million for the Early Learning Fund.
9 For more information, see CRS Report RL31273, Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA): Early Childhood Programs (Section 619 and Part C), by Richard Apling.
10 For more information, see CRS Report RL31241, Reading First and Early Reading First:
Background and Funding, by Gail McCallion.

---

CRS-7
Dependent Care Tax Credit (DCTC). The DCTC is a non-refundable tax
credit for employment-related expenses incurred for the care of a dependent child
under 13 or a disabled dependent or spouse, under Section 21 of the tax code.11
Beginning in tax year 2003, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act
of 2001 (P.L. 107-16) increased the maximum credit rate to 35% of expenses up to
$3,000 for one child (for a credit of $1,050), and up to $6,000 for two or more
children (for a credit of $2,100). The 35% rate applies to taxpayers with adjusted
gross incomes of $15,000 or less. The rate decreases by 1% for each additional
$2,000 increment (or portion thereof) in income until the rate reaches 20% for
taxpayers with incomes over $43,000. The current estimated revenue loss for 2005
is $3 billion, and $2.2 billion for 2006 as determined by the Joint Committee on
Taxation (JCT).
Dependent Care Assistance Program (DCAP). Under Section 129 of the
tax code, payments made by a taxpayer’s employer for dependent care assistance may
be excluded from the employee’s income and, therefore, not be subject to federal
income tax or employment taxes.12 The maximum exclusion is $5,000. Section 125
of the tax code allows employers to include dependent care assistance, along with
other fringe benefits, in nontaxable flexible benefit or “cafeteria” plans. The
estimated revenue loss associated with this income exclusion is $1 billion in 2005
and $1.1 billion for 2006.
11 For more information, see CRS Report RS21466, Dependent Care: Current Tax Benefits
and Legislative Issues, by Christine Scott.
12 Ibid.

---

CRS-8
Table 1. Funding for Federal Child Care and Related Programs,
FY2002-FY2006
($ in millions)
Program (federal admin. agency)
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
CCDBG -discretionary portion (HHS)
$2,100
$2,086h
$2,087k
$2,083l
$2,062m
CCDBG -entitlement portion (HHS)
2,717
2,717b 2,717b
2,717b
2,917n
TANFa (HHS)
a
a
a
a
a
Child and Adult Care Food (USDA)
1,831c
1,915c
2,056c
2,066c
2,174c
Social Services Block Grant (HHS)
1,700d
1,700d
1,700d
1,700d
1,700d,p
Head Start (HHS)
6,538e
6,668f
6,775e,k
6,843e,l
6,786m,o
21st Century Community Learning
Centers (ED)
1,000
994h
999k
991l
981m
Even Start (ED)
250
248h
247k
225l
99m
IDEA Infants and Families (ED)
417
434h
444k
441l
436m
IDEA Preschool Grants (ED)
390
387h
388k
385l
381m
Early Learning Fund / ELOA (HHS)
25
34h
34k
36l
0
Early Reading First (ED)
75
75h
94k
104l
103m
Early Childhood Educator Professional
Development (ED)
15
15h
15k
15l
14.5m
Child Care Access Means Parents in
School (ED)
22i
16h
16k
16l
15.8m
Dependent Care Tax Credit (Treasury)
2,500g
3,200j
3,100j
3,000j
2,200j
Dependent Care Assistance Program
(Treasury)
600g
800g
800g
1,000g
1,100g
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
a. TANF funds ($16.5 billion annually) may be used for child care, but are not specifically
appropriated as such. HHS reports that states spent $1.3 billion in federal TANF funds for child
care within the TANF program in FY2004 (the most recent data available). Also, the FY2004
transfer from the FY2004 TANF allotment to the CCDBG totaled $1.9 billion (representing
11% of the TANF allotment).
b. Funding for TANF and the mandatory portion of CCDBG funding for FY2003 was provided (at
the FY2002 rates) through a series of temporary extensions. For FY2004, funding was also
provided via extensions (P.L. 108-262 carried funding through Sept. 30, 2004). For FY2005,
P.L. 108-308 extended funding at this same rate through Mar. 31, 2005. P.L. 109-4 extended
funding through June 30, 2005, and P.L. 109-19 extended funding through September 30, 2005.
c. Obligations (actual for 2002-2004; estimated for 2005-2006), Department of Agriculture.
d. Total SSBG appropriation amount shown. In FY2003 (most recent data available), $165 million
in SSBG expenditures were for child care.
e. In FY2002 and FY2004, $1.4 billion was advance appropriated for the following year. In FY2005,
$1.389 billion of the $6.843 billion was advance appropriated for FY2006.
f. Of the $6.668 billion, $5.268 billion was available for FY2003, and $1.4 billion was available in
FY2004. The $5.268 billion was exempt from rescissions (or “offsets”) included in P.L. 108-7.
However, the advance appropriation of $1.4 billion for FY2004, included in P.L. 108-7, was
subject to the 0.59% rescission included in the FY2004 appropriations law (P.L. 108-199).
g. Revenue loss, Joint Committee on Taxation.
h. Amount reflects rescission included in P.L. 108-7.
i. This amount excludes $3 million in unobligated funds transferred to the Program Administration
account to help offset a $3.7 million rescission in administrative and related expenses pursuant
to section 803 of the FY2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act.

---

CRS-9
j. Revenue loss, Joint Committee on Taxation. Note: The Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) raised the limit on expenses allowed for the credit,
beginning in tax year 2003.
k. These discretionary programs were subject to an across-the-board rescission of 0.59% included in
P.L. 108-199. For the larger programs, the listed amount reflects the rescission, whereas for the
smaller programs, the use of rounding in the table masks the decrease in the actual
appropriation.
l. The omnibus appropriations law (P.L. 108-447) included an across-the-board rescission of 0.8%
for these discretionary programs. The numbers in the table reflect the offset. (For the smaller
programs, the use of rounding in the table masks the decrease in the actual appropriation.)
m. This amount reflects the 1% across-the-board rescission that applies to discretionary programs
included in this appropriations act (P.L. 109-149).
n. P.L. 109-171 provides $2.917 billion for mandatory child care funding in each of fiscal years 2006-
2010.
o. Of the $6.786 billion (post-rescission), $1.386 billion becomes available in FY2007. In addition
to the amount shown in the table, the Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148) provides $90
million in additional funding for Head Start, to be used specifically for grantees serving children
displaced by last year’s Gulf Coast hurricanes, and to help with costs of renovating Head Start
facilities that were affected by the storms.
p. In addition to the $1.7 billion appropriated in the Labor, HHS, Education law (P.L. 109-148), the
Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149) provides $550 million in SSBG funds, specifically
targeted for needs arising from the Gulf Coast Hurricanes of 2005.
FY2006 Appropriations
Following a lengthy appropriations process that included three continuing
resolutions13 and consideration of two conference reports,14 a bill making
appropriations for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education (H.R. 3010) was
ultimately signed into law (P.L. 109-149) on December 30, 2005.
Table 2 shows how the funding levels included in the conference agreement
(and ultimately approved and signed into law), compare to the levels requested by the
Administration and approved in the House and Senate versions of H.R. 3010,
discussed below. An across-the-board rescission of 1% was applied to discretionary
programs funded under P.L. 109-149, and the numbers in the table reflect that.
President’s FY2006 request. On February 7, 2005, President Bush released
his budget request for FY2006, which proposed to fund most, but not all, child care
and related programs at the same rounded levels provided in FY2005. Exceptions
included Head Start, for which a $45 million increase was proposed, and Even Start
and the Early Learning Fund, both of which the Administration proposed to
eliminate. Table 2 provides the Administration’s proposed funding levels for child
care and related programs for FY2006. (The President’s proposed funding levels for
FY2007 were released February 6, 2006 and are discussed later in this report.)
13 The first continuing resolution (H.J.Res. 68/P.L. 109-77) extended funding through
November 18, 2005. The second (H.J.Res. 72, P.L. 109-105) continued the funding through
December 17, 2005), and the third (H.J.Res. 75, P.L. 109-128) through December 31, 2005.
14 On November 17, 2005, the House failed to approve the first Conference Report (H.Rept.
109-300) on H.R. 3010. A second Conference Report (H.Rept. 109-337) was subsequently
approved by the House on December 14, 2005 (by vote of 215-213), and by unanimous
consent in the Senate on December 21, 2005. Head Start provisions in the two did not
differ.

---

CRS-10
House. On June 24, 2005, the House amended and passed H.R. 3010, a bill
to make FY2006 appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education. House-proposed funding levels for FY2006 matched the
levels requested in the President’s FY2006 budget, with the exception of the Head
Start and Even Start programs, which the House proposed to fund at higher levels
than proposed by the President.

Senate. On July 14, 2005, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved and
reported its own version of H.R. 3010 (S.Rept. 109-103). Proposed funding levels
mirrored those proposed in the House bill, with the following exceptions: Head Start
funding was proposed at a level $25 million less than in the House bill; Even Start
would have been eliminated (as proposed by the Administration); and the IDEA
Infants and Toddlers Program would have been provided with $3 million more than
proposed in the House version.
Table 2. FY2006 Appropriations Compared with House- and
Senate-Passed Levels,
and President’s FY2006 Request
($ in millions)
House-
President’s
passed
Senate-
P.L. 109-149a
FY2006
H.R.
passed
(Conf. Report
Program
Request
3010
H.R. 3010
109-337)
CCDBG discretionary (HHS)
$2,083
$2,083
$2,083
$2,062
SSBG (HHS)
1,700
1,700
1,700
1,700
Head Start (HHS)
6,888
6,899
6,874
6,786
21st CCLC (ED)
991
991
991
981
Even Start (ED)
0
200
0
99
IDEA Infants and Families (ED)
441
441
444
436
IDEA Preschool (ED)
385
385
385
381
Early Learning Fund (HHS)
0
0
0
0
Early Childhood Educator
Professional Development (ED)
15
15
15
15
Early Reading First (ED)
104
104
104
103
Child Care Access Means
Parents in School (CAMPIS)
(ED)
16
16
16
16
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
a. An across-the-board rescission of 1% was applied to discretionary programs funded under P.L.
109-149, and these numbers reflect that rescission. For the smaller programs (i.e. Early
Childhood Educator Professional Development and CAMPIS) the use of rounding masks the
decrease in the appropriation.

---

CRS-11
President Bush’s FY2007 Budget Request
On February 6, 2006, President Bush released his budget request for FY2007,
which proposes to fund most, but not all, child care and related programs at the same
levels provided in FY2006. The exceptions include the Social Services Block Grant,
which would be cut from $1.7 billion to $1.2 billion, and the Even Start program,
which the Administration proposes to eliminate. Table 3 provides the
Administration’s proposed funding levels for child care and related programs for
FY2007 compared to the level of funding received for FY2006.
CCDBG. The President proposes to maintain both the discretionary and
mandatory portions of funding for the child care block grant (referred to in
combination as the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF)) at the same levels
provided for FY2006: $2.062 billion and $2.917 billion, respectively. Level funding
is not anticipated to maintain current service levels. According to budget documents,
the number of children projected to receive child care services funded through
CCDF, TANF (transfers and direct child care spending) and the SSBG will decrease
by 300,000 over the next five years (from 2.1 million estimated to be served in
FY2006, to 1.8 million in FY2011.)15
TANF. The President proposes to maintain TANF in FY2007 at the level
agreed upon in the Deficit Reduction Act (P.L. 109-171), which provides $16.5
billion annually for FY2006-2010. These funds may continue to be used for child
care, at states’ discretion. The President’s budget would also maintain states’
authority to transfer up to 10% of their TANF grants to the SSBG.
SSBG. The SSBG, a potential source of funding for child care, would
experience a cut under the President’s proposal. The President proposes to provide
$1.2 billion for the SSBG in FY2007, a decrease of $500 million from the $1.7
billion provided in the FY2006 HHS Appropriations Act. The Administration
contends that “while SSBG provides State flexibility, as the Congress intended, it
fails to ensure that funds are directed towards activities that achieve results.” In
addition, it argues that “the purposes of SSBG overlap substantially with other
categorical and flexible Federal social service programs.” (Note: the FY2006
Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148) provided an additional $550 million in
special SSBG hurricane relief funding for FY2006, which was largely directed
towards the affected Gulf states.)
Head Start. The President proposes to maintain Head Start funding at a level
of $6.786 billion (the same amount included — post-rescission — in the FY2006
HHS Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149)). In its Justification of Estimates for the
Appropriations Committees, the Administration (HHS) contends that by allowing a
greater portion of Head Start funds to be shifted away from training and technical
assistance and into direct service grants, the number of children estimated to be
15 Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States, FY2007, p. 363.

---

CRS-12
served by Head Start (and Early Head Start) would increase to approximately
917,000 (an increase of roughly 10,000 children from FY2006 estimates).16
21st Century Community Learning Centers. The President recommends
that the 21st CCLC program be funded in FY2007 at the same level as in FY2006:
$981 million. The Administration contends that the request would enable districts
to provide after-school learning opportunities to more than 1.3 million students in
2,900 after-school programs.
IDEA Grants for Infants and Families and Preschool Grants. The
President proposes to maintain the same level of funding for these grants as provided
in FY2006: $436 million for grants to infants and families, and $381 million for
preschool grants. The Administration states that the budget request for infants and
families grants will provide support to 57 state agencies serving approximately
315,400 infants and toddlers with disabilities, and their families. The request for
preschool grants would provide an estimated $502 per child for approximately
759,000 children.
Even Start. For the third year in a row, the Administration is proposing to
eliminate the Even Start program, which, despite last year’s Presidential request, was
funded at a level of $99 million in FY2006, making steps towards eliminating much
but not all, of the program. The FY2007 request — for no funding — would
complete the process. The President has argued that limited resources are better
spent in early childhood programs such as Reading First and Early Reading First,
which, according to the Administration “are better structured to implement proven
research and to achieve the President’s literacy goals.” (The FY2007 budget request
proposes no increase for Early Reading First ($103 million program) or Reading
First ($1 billion program).
Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CAMPIS). The President
proposes to continue funding the CAMPIS program at the same level as in FY2006
(post-rescission), which is $15.8 million. The FY2007 request would fund 181
existing projects.
16 For more details on the President’s FY2007 Budget proposals for Head Start, see CRS
Report RL30952 Head Start: Background and Issues, by Melinda Gish.

---

CRS-13
Table 3. President’s FY2007 Funding Request Compared to
FY2006 Funding for Select Programs
($ in millions)
Difference (+/-) between
President’s request
President’s FY2007 request
Program
FY2007
and FY2006 funding
CCDBG discretionary (HHS)
$2,062
0
CCDBG mandatory (HHS)
2,917
0
SSBG (HHS)
1,200
-500a
Head Start (HHS)
6,786
0b
21st CCLC (ED)
981
0
Even Start
0
-99
IDEA Infants and Families (ED)
436
0
IDEA Preschool (ED)
381
0
Early Childhood Educator
15
0
Professional Development (ED)
Early Reading First (ED)
103
0
Child Care Access Means Parents in
16
0
School (CAMPIS) (ED)
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
a. The calculation of this difference does not account for the additional $550 million in special SSBG
funding that was provided in the FY2006 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148).
b. The calculation of this difference does not account for the additional $90 million in special Head
Start funding that was provided in the FY2006 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148).

The Administration’s Early Childhood Initiative
Good Start, Grow Smart: The Bush Administration’s Early Childhood
Initiative, was first announced by the President in April of 2002 and has been
reflected in budget proposals and program initiatives since that date. Not all the
proposals have been adopted, however. Good Start, Grow Smart focuses on three
overall areas: (1) strengthening Head Start; (2) partnering with states to improve
early childhood education; and (3) providing information to teachers, care givers, and
parents. In the President’s FY2004 budget, he proposed to transfer the Head Start
program to the Department of Education, as well as to provide states with the option
to administer the program. The Head Start reauthorization bill passed by the House
during the 108th Congress (H.R. 2210) did not include the proposal to transfer the
program to ED, but did include provisions to allow a maximum of eight states to
administer the program (provided they meet designated requirements). The Head
Start reauthorization bills of this Congress (H.R. 2123 and S. 2206) emphasize
increased coordination among early childhood programs, but neither proposes either
a departmental transfer of the program or state demonstration projects.

---

CRS-14
The Administration has moved ahead with two other efforts that are in keeping
with the Good Start, Grow Smart initiative, but that did not require legislative
changes to the Head Start Act. One is the Strategic Teacher Education Program, also
known as Project STEP, described by the Head Start Bureau as “a comprehensive,
multi-faceted, sequential professional development endeavor to ensure teachers use
research-based strategies to implement early and emergent literacy.” As part of this
development, during summer and fall 2002, 3,000 Head Start staff and 100 state child
care administrators received 32 hours of training in strategies to support children’s
emerging literacy. Those who were trained are expected to serve as “mentor
coaches” for staff within their respective Head Start programs.
The second effort is the development and implementation of a national reporting
system that can be used to assess the effectiveness of Head Start programs in
achieving successful outcomes for children in terms of school readiness —
particularly the areas of literacy and number knowledge. This national reporting
system was implemented starting in the fall 2003, and assesses Head Start 4- and 5-
year-olds twice a year on educational performance measures — using indicators that
were included in legislation as part of the 1998 reauthorization of Head Start.
Legislative Activity in the 109th Congress
Child Care and Welfare Reauthorizations.17 Both the CCDBG and
TANF were due to be reauthorized at the end of FY2002, and on February 8, 2006,
following 12 temporary extensions, the Deficit Reduction Act was signed into law
(P.L. 109-171), finally reauthorizing TANF and the mandatory portion of child care
funding for FY2006-2010. Essentially, select provisions pertaining to welfare and
child care reauthorizations were adopted from broader, free-standing reauthorization
legislation (H.R. 240) into the Deficit Reduction Act (S. 1932).
With respect to child care, the budget reconciliation act (S. 1932/P.L. 109-
171) increases mandatory child care funding by $200 million annually for FY2006-
FY2010, raising total annual mandatory funding from $2.717 billion to $2.917 billion
(i.e. a $1 billion increase over five years). This provision was initially included in
the welfare and child care reauthorization bill introduced in the House (H.R. 240).
Though less than the proposed increase of $6 billion over five years included in the
Senate committee-passed welfare reauthorization bill (S. 667), the $1 billion reflected
twice the amount proposed by the House Ways and Means Committee in its initial
budget reconciliation recommendations ($500 million over five years) to the Budget
Committee. However, the reconciliation measure does not include a reauthorization
of the CCDBG Act itself (i.e. the program rules and the authorized level of
discretionary child care funding), which is addressed by H.R. 240 and S. 585 (as
17 For more information on welfare reauthorization, including the child care component, see
CRS Issue Brief IB10140, Welfare Reauthorization: Overview of the Issues, by Gene Falk,
Melinda Gish, and Carmen Solomon-Fears and CRS Report RS22369, TANF, Child Care,
Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit Reduction Act
of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.

---

CRS-15
passed by the Senate HELP Committee, but still awaiting consideration by the full
Senate). Brief summaries of those bills can be found below.
H.R. 240, by Representative Pryce (Approved by Ways and Means
Subcommittee, March 15, 2005; Amended and Approved by Education
and Workforce Committee, October 20, 2005). The Personal Responsibility,
Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2005 resembles the welfare and child care
reauthorization bill passed by the House in the 108th Congress, with respect to the
bill’s child care provisions. H.R. 240 would set mandatory child care funding at
$2.917 billion in each of FY2006-FY2010, for an increase of $1 billion over five
years above current funding. This is the one child care provision that was adopted by
the Deficit Reduction Act (S. 1932/P.L. 109-171). The authorized level for the
discretionary portion of CCDBG funding would be increased by $200 million
annually beginning in FY2006 ($2.3 billion), reaching $3.1 billion in FY2010.
This bill would also increase the child care quality set-aside from 4% to 6%,
and would amend state child care plan requirements to encourage states to improve
the quality of child care available to families, and to promote school readiness by
encouraging the exposure of children in care to nurturing environments and
developmentally — appropriate activities. Likewise, the bill would allow states to
establish CCDBG income eligibility limits at any level (prioritized by need),
eliminating current law’s federal limit of 85% of state median income. Lastly, the
bill would require that aggregated statistics on child care supply, demand, and quality
be included in biennial reports to Congress. (It should be noted that two committees
have jurisdiction over child care: the Education and Workforce Committee maintains
jurisdiction of the CCDBG Act itself, which includes the program rules and the
authorization for discretionary funding, while the Ways and Means Committee has
responsibility for the mandatory child care funding stream that supports CCDBG
programs. The mandatory funding is included in Section 418 of the Social Security
Act, within the same title (Title IV) that includes the TANF program. (As noted
earlier, TANF funds may also be used by states to support child care.)
Amendments to H.R. 240, by the Education and Workforce Committee.
H.R. 240 as approved by the Education and Workforce Committee on October 20,
2005, adopted two CCDBG-related amendments (offered by Representative Fortuño).
The first would require states to certify in their state plans that they will provide
information to parents on the IDEA Part C program, as a way to foster coordination
between the program and CCDBG. The second amendment calls for states to collect
and report information on the ethnicity and primary language of children receiving
CCDBG services and also would add a definition of limited English proficiency to
the law.
Failed Amendment to H.R. 240, by the Ways and Means Human Resources
Subcommittee. On March 15, 2005, the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human
Resources debated H.R. 240, and ultimately approved it (8-4), with solely Republican
support. Child care funding remains a contentious issue, and Representative Stark
offered an amendment to increase mandatory child care funding by $11 billion over
five years (as opposed to the $1 billion included in the bill), but it was rejected.

---

CRS-16
H.R. 751, by Representative McDermott (Introduced February 10,
2005). The Work, Family, and Opportunity Promotion Act includes provisions to
reauthorize TANF, and proposes to increase mandatory child care funding by $11
billion over five years. This bill has not received committee action.
On the Senate side, bills (S. 105 and S. 6) to reauthorize welfare and aspects
of child care were introduced early in the Congress, but these are not the bills that
have received committee action. On March 9, 2005, both the Finance Committee and
the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee approved and
ordered reported bills (S. 667 and S. 525) to reauthorize welfare and child care
respectively, described below. Note that in the Senate, the Finance Committee has
jurisdiction over the mandatory child care funding (and TANF), and the HELP
Committee holds responsibility for the CCDBG Act. As mentioned earlier, a
mandatory child care component ($1 billion over five years) was included in the
budget reconciliation bill (S. 1932), signed into law (P.L. 109-171) on February 8,
2006.
S. 667, Personal Responsibility and Individual Development for
Everyone (PRIDE) Act of 2005 (Finance Committee Ordered Reported
March 9, 2005). The Senate Finance Committee approved and ordered reported,
with bipartisan support, a bill (S. 667) referred to as the Personal Responsibility and
Individual Development for Everyone (PRIDE) Act of 2005. The bill, which would
reauthorize TANF through FY2010, proposes to maintain the TANF block grant at
its current level and to provide an additional $6 billion in mandatory child care
funding over five years. The bill also proposes to provide an additional $1 billion
over five years to the Social Services Block Grant. The allowable transfer from
TANF to the SSBG would be maintained at 10%.
S. 525, The Caring for Children Act of 2005 (HELP Committee
Ordered Reported, March 9, 2005). This bill, introduced by Senator Alexander
on March 3, 2005, closely resembles the CCDBG reauthorization bill reported out
of the HELP Committee last Congress (S. 880). As was the case with the earlier bill,
the HELP Committee approved S. 525 with bipartisan support.
Major provisions would: authorize CCDBG discretionary funding at a level
of $2.3 billion for FY2006, rising in $200 million increments up to $3.1 billion for
FY2010; increase the percentage of funds that must be used for quality activities
(newly specified in the proposal) from at least 4% to at least 6%; instruct states to use
not less than 70% of funds remaining after quality and administrative set-asides for
direct services (as defined by states); add three new goals to the act: (1) improving
the quality of child care, (2) promoting school preparedness through developmentally
and age-appropriate activities in child care, and (3) promoting parental and family
involvement in the education of young children in child care settings; eliminate the
federal eligibility maximum limit of 85% of state median income (SMI); require
states to describe in their state plans how they will coordinate with other early
childhood programs such as Head Start, state pre-kindergarten, and IDEA to expand
accessibility to and continuity of care; require states to conduct statistically valid
market rate surveys within two years preceding their state plans, and to set rates in
accordance with the results (without reducing the number of children served); expand
data collection requirements; and require states beginning in FY2006 to submit a plan

---

CRS-17
addressing the quality of child care services provided. Title II of the bill contains
provisions to enhance security at child care centers in federal facilities, and Title III
establishes a small business child care grant program, through which competitive
grants would be awarded to states for establishment and operation of employer-
operated child care programs. (S. 525 authorizes $50 million over five years for this
purpose, whereas S. 880 had authorized $30 million. S. 525 also proposes to change
the CCDBG allocation for tribes from “not less than 1% and not more than 2%” to
a concrete “2%.”)

S. 105, by Senator Talent (Introduced January 24, 2005). This
Senate version of the Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of
2005 contains the same child care provisions as are proposed in H.R. 240 (see
above).
S. 6, by Senator Santorum (Introduced January 24, 2005). Among
tax and TANF reauthorization provisions, the Family and Community Protection Act
of 2005 (S. 6) includes an additional $1 billion over five years in mandatory child
care funding.
Head Start Reauthorization. The Head Start program has been due to be
reauthorized since the end of FY2003. On September 22, 2005, the House passed
H.R. 2123 (by a vote of 231-284). The Senate has not yet brought a bill to the floor,
but the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee has approved and
reported S. 1107/ S.Rept. 109-131. Summaries of major provisions in the two bills
(H.R. 2123, as passed by the House; and S. 1107, as approved (by voice vote) by the
full HELP Committee in the Senate) can be found in CRS Report RL30952, Head
Start: Background and Issues, by Melinda Gish.
Other Child Care-Related Legislation. Other bills related to child care
that have been introduced thus far in the 109th Congress include H.R. 335 (Lynch),
a bill to amend the CCDBG Act to increase availability and quality of child care by
creating incentives for people age 55 and over to become child care providers; S. 15
(Bingaman), a bill that includes several provisions to amend both the Head Start Act
and the CCDBG Act to expand access to programs and to improve program quality;
S. 32 (Dayton), a bill authorizing the Secretary of Defense to fund child care for
active duty military without access to a military child development center; and S. 233
(Roberts), a bill providing grants for building a child care training infrastructure and
for encouraging employer-provided child care.
Response to Hurricane Katrina
Following Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) issued a series of information memoranda alerting Head Start grantees and
state child care administrators to various efforts being made to assist their respective
programs in helping children and families affected by Hurricane Katrina.
Specifically, the Head Start Bureau has urged all its grantees to provide
Head Start services to any displaced children and families now in their communities
as a result of the hurricane. On September 12, 2005, HHS announced that it was
making available $15 million for this purpose, to help cover costs over a 30-day

---

CRS-18
period. Grantees have been instructed to treat any preschool-aged child whose family
has been displaced from their home as income eligible, with or without
documentation. The Head Start Bureau has anticipated that programs serving newly
enrolled displaced children may struggle to meet certain Head Start regulations, and
has issued guidance for requesting waivers in those areas. Moreover, the Bureau has
encouraged grantees to contact their regional federal offices with any concerns
arising from serving evacuated families. The regional offices have been asked (by
HHS) to collect data (on a daily basis) from their respective grantees regarding the
number of evacuee children being served by their program(s), and whether these
children are new to Head Start, or, instead were previously enrolled in a Head Start
program in the community from which they have been displaced as a result of
Hurricane Katrina. For copies of documents prepared by HHS relating to Head
Start’s role in responding to children and families affected by Hurricane Katrina, as
well as procedures for addressing damaged facilities, see the following website:
[http://www.headstartinfo.org/hurricane_rir.htm].
Most recently, the Defense Department’s Appropriations Act for FY2006,
signed into law (P.L. 109-148) on December 30, 2005, includes $90 million in
additional funding for Head Start, to be used specifically for grantees serving
children displaced by last year’s Gulf Coast hurricanes, and to help with costs of
renovating Head Start facilities that were affected by the storms. Those funds will
not be allocated according to the standard Head Start formula due to the targeted
purpose of the funding. The Head Start Bureau has taken action to assess and
address the needs of Head Start grantees in response to last year’s hurricanes. Data
collected will be used to determine allocation of the $90 million to affected grantees.
The Defense Appropriations Act also includes SSBG funding in the amount
of $550 million for use in covering expenses related to the consequences of last
year’s hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. (Expenses could potentially include child
care costs.) The Defense Appropriations Act expands the potential services for
which the additional $550 million may be used, to include “health services (including
mental health services) and for repair, renovation and construction of health facilities
(including mental health facilities).” The act does not stipulate how the funds will
be allocated among affected states, only that section 2003 of SSBG law, which would
allocate funds to states nationwide based on population, is notwithstanding.
The Child Care Bureau of HHS has issued guidance regarding ways in
which state child care administrators may use their Child Care and Development
Block Grant (CCDBG) funds to help respond to needs resulting from the hurricane.
No additional emergency grant funds have been provided, but state administrators
have been made aware of various options for their use of funds, for example, making
funds previously reserved (at a minimum 4% level) for “quality activities” available
for use in providing emergency child care for displaced families. Likewise, states are
reminded that they may amend their state CCDBG plans to redefine eligibility
conditions (e.g., redefine “working”) or priority rules and broaden them to be more
inclusive of displaced families. For the full information memorandum sent to the
state CCDBG lead agency administrators, see [http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/
ccb/policy1/current/im0503/im0503.htm].

---

CRS-19
Hearings
On March 15, 2005, the House Education and Workforce Committee’s
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness held a hearing titled “Welfare
Reform: Reauthorization of Work and Child Care.” Testimony can be found at
[http://edworkforce.house.gov/hearings/109th/21st/welfare031505/wl031505.htm].
crsphpgw

---